Reynolds v. Woodall
2012 UT App 206
Utah Ct. App.2012Background
- Reynolds purchased property in Sandy, Utah in 2004, secured by two trust deeds and promissory notes in first and second positions.
- Citibank refinanced Reynolds’ second loan in 2006 with First American Title as trustee; a second trust deed was recorded.
- In 2008 Reynolds refinanced the first loan with Bank of Utah, later recorded in first position with U.S. Bank as successor beneficiary.
- defaults on both promissory notes led Woodall (for Citibank) to record a notice of default in 2009 but did not serve Reynolds; substitution of trustee was not yet recorded; eTitle later recorded notices in the first position.
- Trustee’s sale occurred September 16, 2009; Kemker Trust purchased the Property and obtained title subject to the first deed; a substitution of trustee naming Woodall was recorded October 30, 2009.
- Reynolds filed suit challenging the trustee’s sale; the trial court dismissed claims against Woodall and granted summary judgment for the Kemker Trust; the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Citibank’s ratification after sale validates the sale | Reynolds argues late ratification violates Utah law | Woodall/Citibank rely on statute to permit ratification | No need to reach merits; Reynolds failed to plead prejudice; affirmed. |
| Whether Reynolds stated a claim to void the sale due to late substitution | Reynolds contends late substitution harmed her rights | Substitution of trustee ratified post-sale valid under statute | Rejected; lack of pleaded prejudice and no shown injury; affirmed. |
| Whether the dismissal without prejudice of Citibank creates lack of appellate jurisdiction | Reynolds challenges finality of the order | Rule 4(b) dismissal can be final for appeal when others are disposed | The action was final for appeal; this court has jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- RM Lifestyles, LLC v. Ellison, 263 P.3d 1152 (Utah Ct. App. 2011) (discusses notice and substitution timing in foreclosures)
- Concepts, Inc. v. First Sec. Realty Servs., Inc., 743 P.2d 1158 (Utah 1987) (notice of default objective to prevent property sacrifice)
- Timm v. Dewsnup, 86 P.3d 699 (Utah 2003) (notice requirements; sales not set aside absent prejudice)
- Bailey v. Bayles, 52 P.3d 1158 (Utah 2002) (appellate review can affirm on any valid ground)
- Orr v. Uintah Cnty., 262 P.3d 437 (Utah Ct. App. 2011) (rule 12(b)(6) standard on dismissal)
- York v. Performance Auto, Inc., 264 P.3d 212 (Utah Ct. App. 2011) (finality of orders for appeal)
- Bradbury v. Valencia, 5 P.3d 649 (Utah 2000) (finality and appealability considerations)
- Bowles v. Utah Dep’t of Transp., 652 P.2d 1345 (Utah 1982) (finality when dismissal ends controversy)
- Hunter v. Sunrise Title Co., 84 P.3d 1163 (Utah 2004) (service timing and dismissal consequences)